PPA on Fox & Friends

[Cactus Jack]

Fair and balanced.

[Synergistic Explosions]

I saw it and was dissapointed in the way the debate went. Especially the question the idiot host asked about 'is it or is it not possible to lose your house online'. Classic answer by BG, 'it's not possible to transfer your house to your account balance'.

Someone has got to come up with a concise answer to the Republican justification of the 'click a mouse, lose your house' line of BS.

[tangled]

[ QUOTE ]
I saw it and was dissapointed in the way the debate went. Especially the question the idiot host asked about 'is it or is it not possible to lose your house online'. Classic answer by BG, 'it's not possible to transfer your house to your account balance'.

Someone has got to come up with a concise answer to the Republican justification of the 'click a mouse, lose your house' line of BS.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I'm going to sound like a broken record, but the way to counteract it is to embrace it. Remind them that online gaming is not going to go away just because a law is passed. So if you are going to stop someone from clicking away their house, you have to set up safeguards to do it. And the only way to do that is with regulation.

If people hadn't come to the conclusion that the 18th amendment was futile and causing more harm than good, it never would have been abolished.

The UIGEA is the virtual equivalent of the chastity belt.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]

I know I'm going to sound like a broken record, but the way to counteract it is to embrace it. Remind them that online gaming is not going to go away just because a law is passed. So if you are going to stop someone from clicking away their house, you have to set up safeguards to do it. And the only way to do that is with regulation.

If people hadn't come to the conclusion that the 18th amendment was futile and causing more harm than good, it never would have been abolished.

The UIGEA is the virtual equivalent of the chastity belt.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like regulation too.

Here's the problem: whether you like it or not, society has decided to reject your argument for the legalization of drugs. So if you make an argument that sounds too close to the drug war, it will automatically be rejected because people already know their position.

[blutarski]

I'm not sure there's any point in trying to change a typical FOX News viewer's opinion on anything. They are not looking for both sides of a story to help shape a point of view based on the relevant, available information. They simply want someone who agrees with what they already believe.

[canvasbck]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure there's any point in trying to change a typical FOX News viewer's opinion on anything. They are not looking for both sides of a story to help shape a point of view based on the relevant, available information. They simply want someone who agrees with what they already believe.

[/ QUOTE ]

Be careful in lumping "Fox viewers" together like that. When we do that, we are no better than the idiots who believe that all poker players are degenerate gamblers who will gamble away their house. I happen to watch foxnews pretty regularly and even classify myself as a <gasp> conservative republican. As a conservative, I support smaller government and want them to leave me the hell alone when I chose to play poker in my own home. I agree with most others on here that FoF has ruined a once great party.

[JPFisher55]

When Fox news starts talking about so-called family values, I close my ears. Otherwise, it is far superior to the so-called mainstrean media.

[Coy_Roy]

[ QUOTE ]
Otherwise, it is far superior to the so-called mainstrean media.


[/ QUOTE ]


Please tell us you're joking.........please.........no really........it's a joke right?.......Please?

[Coy_Roy]

[4_2_it]

Enough Fox bashing. I could post plenty of CNN errors that are more egregious then this. Let's stay on topic and continue to address the arguments that Fox news and its viewers use to discredit us.